SF-Admin Data and Analytics Management Practice Question
An administrator has created a custom report type on Accounts with Contacts. Sales users complain that when they run this report, many important accounts are missing from the results. Upon investigation, the administrator discovers that the missing accounts have no related contact records. How should the administrator resolve this issue?
⚠ Common exam trap
Candidates often try to create a new report or use cross-filters. They fail to realize the report type relationship setting (inner vs. outer join) is the root cause of the missing data.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Modify the custom report type layout to change the relationship setting from 'A' records must match 'B' records to 'A' records may or may not match 'B' records.
Account with Contacts report types use an inner join relationship by default, meaning only parent accounts possessing at least one child contact will appear in results. Changing the relationship layout setting to include accounts with or without related contacts ensures complete visibility across the entire account portfolio.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
Modify the custom report type layout to change the relationship setting from 'A' records must match 'B' records to 'A' records may or may not match 'B' records.
Why this is correct
Adjusting the primary and secondary object relationship within the custom report type definition converts the query from an inner join to a left outer join. This modification ensures parent records without children are correctly displayed in user reports.
- ✗
Create a workflow rule that automatically generates a placeholder contact whenever a new account record is saved.
Why it's wrong here
Generating dummy contact records pollutes customer databases with redundant, inaccurate data and distorts downstream analytics and marketing campaigns. Report structural issues should always be solved by correcting report type definitions rather than dirtying database records.
- ✗
Update the organization-wide sharing settings for Contacts from Controlled by Parent to Public Read/Write.
Why it's wrong here
Changing sharing settings affects overall record visibility across the application but does not alter the fundamental inner join logic of standard custom report types. Accounts without contacts will still be excluded from inner-join report queries regardless of sharing models.
- ✗
Instruct users to manually apply a cross filter that specifies Accounts without Contacts before executing the report.
Why it's wrong here
Cross filters can filter out records meeting specific criteria, but they cannot force an inner join report type to display parent records that were excluded by the underlying database query structure. Modifying the report type relationship is the proper architectural solution.
Visual reference
About these practice questions
One of 202 original SF-Admin practice questions on Courseiva, each with a full explanation and wrong-answer analysis — not exam dumps or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written and reviewed by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
Last reviewed September 2026 · checked against the official Salesforce exam blueprint
This SF-Admin practice question is part of Courseiva's free Salesforce certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the SF-Admin exam.